At 02:55 PM 8/6/2001 -0700, Hong Zhang wrote:
>There are many typos. Please correct them.
I see. I'll fix 'em.
>The branch instruction is wrong. It should be "branch #num".
>The offset should be part of instruction, not from register.
Nope, because that kills the potential for computed relative branches.
(It's in there on purpose) Branches should work from both constants and
registers.
>The register set seems too big. It reduces cache efficiency
>and uses too much stack.
Yeah, that's something I'm worried about. 64 may be too much. 16 is too
few, so we might split the difference and go with 32 to start. Depends on
how much register wastage we have pushing and popping stack frames. At
least push/pop operations on whole frames are pathetically cheap.
(test&increment in the easy push case, test&decrement in the pop case)
>We also have to define caller saved
>register vs callee saved register just like other calling
>convention.
I'm planning on callee saved register sets, however I'm holding off a bit
to see what Larry's got in mind for the perl-level syntax before defining
the calling conventions much more than "we have some".
> > I've put the draft of the assembly PDD up on the web.
> > http://www.sidhe.org/~dan/perl/perl_assembly.html or
> > http://www.sidhe.org/~dan/perl/perl_assembly.txt for the POD.
> >
> > Not done, but good enough to start a discussion on, I think.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > --------------------------------------"it's like
> > this"-------------------
> > Dan Sugalski even samurai
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
> > teddy bears get drunk
> >
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
